The link i'm trying to make is that does a prime number exist before we find it?/ does what the universe is expanding into exist before the universe expands into it?.
The further out into the universe you look the more sparsly spaced the galaxies become and the same goes for primes.
If you took size of the universe from a "supposed" centre, would the spacing of the galaxies equate to anything similar to that of the primes?
And if they did couldn't you make a pretty accurate guestamate as to the amount of galaxies in total!.
P.S. I always look at the prime numbers as the universe, the big bang obviously being "0" with the force of nature expanding both infinitely.
This is probably all rubbish!, you know what it's like when you get an idea in your head.
2007-07-25 13:57:16 · 10 answers · asked by pjklondon 2 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
It's an interesting idea, and prime numbers have some similarity to the expanding universe (for those that don't see it, maybe they just haven't looked at it from the right angle).
But consider that prime numbers and the distribution of galaxies and the expanding universe are just parts of a larger whole that we don't (or can't) see yet.
The similarities could be because both are reflections (different mirrors, admittedly) of one larger perspective, but we can only see what is in the mirrors, we don't see the larger whole that the mirrors are reflecting.
When you look in a mirror on the wall, you only see part of the room, you don't see the whole room. But the whole room is there nonetheless.
One caveat - if you use the word *always*, you limit yourself - you don't allow what else might be possible to be considered.
2007-07-25 14:46:11 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
It is only the galaxies within the Universe that are expanding their radii relative to the Barry center of the Universe which is itself continually moving forming an orbital .
The reason for expansion is due to galactic mass increase . So in order for Galaxies to maintain gravitational equilbrium their radii must expand. The reverse occurs for those Galaxies that lose mass faster than they gain it.
The whole scenario is evidence of a gravitational phenomenon.
If all the star which have already being extinct indicates that they have lost mass to their surrounding as indicated per the 2nd law of thermodynamics. The Universe Degrades with time.The mass lost is received by other galaxies which will expand.
The Universe behaves as such ,in order to maintain rotational equilibrium. It has been designed to maintain a steady state of equilibrium.
If the Universe was given enough time its Galaxies will eventually burn out at that point all the star would no longer emit light.From there on ;The galaxies will no longer expand in the Universe and will come to a Halt.Unless supernatural revamping occurs. May be we could do without stars.But without Mass radiation from the Sun the earth would not survive ,unless a supernatural energy source is supplied to maintain life.
Hence science of physics sees the Universe as Ending its existance, unless a new mechanism is reconstructed by Our Creator ; for without Him the Universe is Hopeless.
2007-07-25 14:39:51 · answer #2 · answered by goring 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The universe existed before, as you say, it expanded. Or at least, that is my belief. I do not believe prime numbers have any correlation to the spacing of the galaxies...why would you think so? Nor do I believe the universe to be infinite...it is merely very very very large. It is presumptuous of humans to think we are the largest, and that anything larger must be indefinite, but this is not the case.
2007-07-25 14:07:49 · answer #3 · answered by Brommy A 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
This is a very good question. Whether the universe keeps on expanding or not depends on the existance of dark matter and if this dark matter has mass. Refer to the hubble constant. If you like to read there is a book called "the whole shebang " which describes in detail the question you are asking. Hope this helped. Good luck!
2007-07-25 14:04:26 · answer #4 · answered by justask23 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
This thought process reminds me of Kepler's idea that the orbits of the planets were somehow based on the geometric ratios of the Platonic solids. A really beautiful thought, but there is no reason to connect one with the other, and in truth they are probably not related at all. On the other hand, thinking like Kepler is not such a bad thing...
2007-07-25 15:14:25 · answer #5 · answered by Larry454 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The number of prime numbers is infinite. No one know if the size of the universe is infinite or even if the term "size" has any meaning with regard to the universe. My suspicion is that every day concepts like size, beginning and end don't apply to the universe. We'll probably have to have help from the AI super being we are about to create to help us with these concepts, assuming it doesn't kill us off first.
2007-07-25 14:10:40 · answer #6 · answered by Michael da Man 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The matter in this universe will not expand indefinitely, because all matter has gravity weather it emits light or not... Matter has always existed and it's moving, why is it still here? because it contracts and expands over and over... forever.
2007-07-25 15:18:34 · answer #7 · answered by spir_i_tual 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It is unclear
Some expect it to fall back on itself after a long time time.
It may not, however.
2007-07-25 15:20:04 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Rubbish. Concomitant but not related to each other.
2007-07-25 14:17:49 · answer #9 · answered by david m 3 · 0⤊ 3⤋
keep it up. you could be the next einstein.
2007-07-25 14:05:20 · answer #10 · answered by phantomraider101 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋